Talk:Jacob's Well

Palestine Mid‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages: Crusades Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Crusades task force.

A fact from Jacob's Well appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 December 2008, and was viewed approximately 7,331 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Jacob's Well (pictured) in Nablus is a site associated with Jacob in Jewish, Samaritan, Christian and Muslim tradition?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2008/December.

Wikipedia

Thanks[edit]

Al Ameer son, thanks for pitching in. About the source that says the church is beside the well ... I was there just recently and the well is located below the church, not beside it. To get to the well, you go into the church, through the main doors, past the pews, to the back, near the altar, where there are stairs going down. Down there, is the well, and a small souvenir stand. Anyway, I don't know what to do about these weird inconsistencies introduced by the sources. For example, I don't have a source that says the new church has been complete. But I was there, entered it, took a picture of it and there was no sign of construction (or unfinished things) anywhere. Anyway, thanks again for your additions. Do you want to nominate it for a DYK, or should I? Tiamut^talk 20:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I must admit that the source did not say adjacent or near, but nothing on the exact location. So that was an OR assumption on my part. Thankfully you caught it. I was very happy that you started the article; I always wanted to create it, but I was lazy or working on another article. You should nominate it, I only added an eight of the text. I'll add some images in a minute. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:34, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Al Ameer for clearing that up. I don't think it was your laziness that let me beat you to it. You are a tireless contributor here and all your contributions are much appreciated. I will nominate it, and have no problem with making it a co-nomination. Sometimes, it not how much you add, but rather how you add it. Collaboration doesn't depend on quantity, but a spirit of pitching in as a team. Anyway, I'll see what I can think of for a hook and put it soon. Tiamut^talk 20:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Church or Monastery, or both?[edit]

Just for category reasons, is the structure atop Jacob's well a church or a monastery. The caption says church, so I assume I should recategorize to Category:Churches in the West Bank. Just need a quick clarification. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can gather from the sources and from my visit there, the large building pictured at the top of the article is the structure directly over the crypt that contains the well and it is a church. However, the church is located on the wider grounds of what sources call a monastery (there are courtyards, gardens, and other structures there beside the church, but I did not ask while I was there if there were lots of monks living there. I only know for sure of a priest whose house is oppostie the church an who acts as a custodian of the well.) Tiamut^talk 10:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think church would be best then. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:04, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Subcategory[edit]

This article is at the moment the only one in Category:Religion in the Palestinian territories that is not in one of the subcategories. In which one or ones do we think it had best be put? Debresser (talk) 10:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photine[edit]

Where do you come up with 'Photina'? The name, as it is given by tradition, and as it has the meaning of 'Illuminated' or 'Luminous' is Φωτεινή, which may be transcribed as Photini (phonetically correct), or Photeine, if we follow the classical transcription, but there is no -a at the end. I was at the well just a couple of days ago, and of course the name you see in the icons, and as the monks will give it to you is Photini. Please allow us Greeks to spell our own names, thank you very much. I am correcting it, and unless you can bring any evidence to the contrary, please leave it as it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.166.22.54 (talk) 19:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Take it easy, man. Debresser (talk) 16:32, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

A number of the referenced webpages seem to have disappeared. Are there good alternatives that could be used? PeterC (talk) 11:38, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jacob's Well. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081215074901/http://www.pushproject.org/page78/page8/page5/Al-Quds%20Sites.html to http://www.pushproject.org/page78/page8/page5/Al-Quds%20Sites.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:43, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No Jewish recognition, no claim to it. Muslim recognition, really?[edit]

Jewish recognition: I guess Gurevich & Harani set it straight (don't have full access). Used as a false accusation as part of the blood libel in connection with the murder of the priest by a mentally ill Jew from Tel Aviv. Jews never recognised it as connected to Jacob, and therefore never laid any claim to it. This must be rectified in the article. Didn't check Bromley - if he does indeed claim that it's a holy site for Jews too, and based on what. In connection with the 1979 murder of Father Philoumenos, it's just antisemitic junk. Arminden (talk) 07:28, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gurevich & Harani (2017; p. 28 with note 4 sending to p. 48) states that "Judaism does not attribute any significance to the site", citing Yitzhak Magen (2009), Flavia Neapolis: Shechem in the Roman Period, vol. 1, p. 32.

Bromiley's one-sentence claim is here.

Muslim recognition: again, it's only Bromiley's one sentence claiming that. There is no further reference in the article in favour of Muslims associating the well with Yakub. Arminden (talk) 10:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]